:00:12. > :00:17.One-nation under Ed, the leader of the Labour Party delivers a speech
:00:17. > :00:22.unlike any we have ever heard from him. That spirit of one-nation,
:00:22. > :00:29.one-nation, a country where everyone has a stake, one-nation, a
:00:29. > :00:35.country where prosperity is fairly shared, one-nation, where we have a
:00:35. > :00:39.shared destiny. What would Benjamin Disraeli, the Conservative who
:00:39. > :00:44.invented the one-nation idea make of the Miliband version. More to
:00:44. > :00:49.the point, what will the people of the 21st century make of it.
:00:49. > :00:53.How much does an Afghan have to do for our Armed Forces before we let
:00:53. > :00:57.him live here. This one was blown up, but still denied asylum. Even
:00:58. > :01:00.after this, I have left my job, they will kill me for sure, they
:01:00. > :01:05.won't let me. They need to take their revenge.
:01:05. > :01:11.Over in the corner of the studio, the President of the Royal Society
:01:11. > :01:21.of Chemistry tests a scientific phenomenon that defeated Aristotle,
:01:21. > :01:22.
:01:22. > :01:29.why does hot water freeze faster than cold water.
:01:29. > :01:36.He didn't say "prick me, do I not bleed", but Ed Miliband, generally
:01:36. > :01:41.considered the low-calorie calibre of party leader, did pull over a
:01:41. > :01:45.pretty good speech today. No script and some bad joke, they all seemed
:01:45. > :01:48.pretty impressed in the hall where the Labour Party was having its
:01:48. > :01:52.get-together. That is not a normal cross section of people. In the man
:01:52. > :01:55.of the blind the one-eyed man is king, of course. Labour know if
:01:55. > :02:00.they are to have a chance of winning the next election, Ed
:02:00. > :02:05.Miliband has to make much more of an impression than he has managed
:02:05. > :02:09.to do so far. Allegra Stratton there was. He seemed to have
:02:09. > :02:13.impressed them. Can you speak 70 minutes without notes. Two minutes
:02:13. > :02:17.is tricky enough. It was quite electric, I was standing near some
:02:17. > :02:26.people who have been very critical of him before, it was amazing. My
:02:26. > :02:29.theory is this, he's now up to his opt number -- optimum operating
:02:29. > :02:33.capacity. This is Ed Miliband he knew he could be and his team, but
:02:33. > :02:37.this is the Ed Miliband we haven't seen since he was Environment
:02:38. > :02:40.Secretary, or running to be Labour leader. It was went back when it
:02:40. > :02:44.was promised this guy could do something, he got the job and he
:02:44. > :02:48.did wobble for a long time. He has only really righted himself today.
:02:48. > :02:51.There have been some impressive substantial speeches recently, but
:02:52. > :02:56.not in terms of performance. There were arguments in today's speech,
:02:56. > :03:00.but I think he's been making them before, actual low, it is just that
:03:00. > :03:07.he sort of opted for this one- nation thing, which is cheekiness.
:03:07. > :03:12.What, for me, was the key thing, was the performance. The confidence
:03:12. > :03:15.it will give him shouldn't be underestimated, when he now has the
:03:16. > :03:19.quite formidable task of going out and turning that, the newspaper
:03:19. > :03:24.reported them yesterday, the two out of ten who think he would be
:03:24. > :03:27.the good Prime Minister, into a lot more. You look sceptical. Do you
:03:28. > :03:31.think people will genuinely change their political allegiance that he
:03:31. > :03:34.can deliver an apparently unscripted speech for over an hour?
:03:34. > :03:37.Of course not. What speech like this do is give a movement and team
:03:37. > :03:42.a sense of confidence, and a hall and party a sense of confidence.
:03:42. > :03:44.There may be a few people out there who will start to notice. We are
:03:44. > :03:49.two-and-a-half years away from an election, people aren't going to
:03:49. > :03:52.form their judgments now. What, I think, we should bear in mind with
:03:52. > :03:55.the polls, they are very damning for him, they have a lot of work on
:03:55. > :03:59.that. The work they also had on speech-making, they now clearly
:03:59. > :04:03.don't have to do. But in terms of those polls, the thing people say
:04:03. > :04:06.is, of course people see David Cameron as Prime Minister, because
:04:06. > :04:10.I is Prime Minister. It is difficult when you are the --
:04:10. > :04:13.because he is Prime Minister. It is very difficult when you are the
:04:13. > :04:16.leader of the opposition to do that, it is difficult to convey that. He
:04:16. > :04:25.has a huge way to go, it is just one of the things he had to tick
:04:25. > :04:29.off, he did tick off today. Week two, day two, 2.00pm, party
:04:29. > :04:34.leader two of the invisible party conference season.
:04:34. > :04:40.Another leader arriving for their speech, a speech destined to be
:04:40. > :04:46.forgotten. The mid-term director- general. Move along, there is
:04:46. > :04:49.nothing to see here. -- dirge. Move along, there is nothing to see here.
:04:49. > :04:53.Us journalists like to say this is the speech of someone's life,
:04:53. > :04:58.usually it isn't. This one is moderately to very important, he
:04:58. > :05:03.has to prove at this prifvot point in parliament that he has the ideas.
:05:04. > :05:09.The trouble for the speech writers is this is something
:05:09. > :05:14.impersuceptible, people here and out there will feel it in their gut.
:05:14. > :05:19.From the beginning he was going for the guts. This, is actually quite
:05:19. > :05:23.rare. Only one problem, where is my speech. I want to do something
:05:23. > :05:28.different today. I want to tell you my story. I want to tell you who I
:05:28. > :05:34.am, what I believe, and why I have a deep conviction that together we
:05:34. > :05:39.can change this country. My conviction is rooteded in my
:05:39. > :05:43.family's story. A story that starts a thousand miles from here. Because
:05:43. > :05:48.the Milibands haven't sat under the same oak tree for the last 500
:05:48. > :05:52.years. No notes, no elect tern, no guide text for people like me, this
:05:52. > :05:56.was 70 minutes of not particularly new personal anecdotes, but
:05:56. > :06:01.defiantly new confidence, and a defiantly new argument. For many,
:06:01. > :06:07.this was pre-leadership Miliband, back when he was promise, not
:06:07. > :06:10.disappointment. My parents didn't tell me what career to go into. My
:06:10. > :06:20.late father, some of you know, wouldn't agree with many of the
:06:20. > :06:27.things I stand for. He would have loved the idea of Red Ed! But, he
:06:27. > :06:31.would have been a little disappointed it wasn't true. My mum
:06:31. > :06:35.probably doesn't agree with me either, but like most mums, is too
:06:35. > :06:39.kind to say so! Look, when I was younger, I wasn't certain I wanted
:06:39. > :06:43.to be a politician, but I do believe the best way for me to give
:06:43. > :06:48.back to Britain, the best way to be true to my faith, is through
:06:48. > :06:54.politics. Then, for the political cross
:06:54. > :07:02.dressing, so beloved of our leaders. 140 years ago to the year, another
:07:02. > :07:07.leader of the opposition gave a speech. It was in Free Trade Hall
:07:07. > :07:14.that used to stand opposite this building, it's a rad son now, by
:07:14. > :07:17.the way. His -- Radisson now, by the way. His name was Benjamin
:07:17. > :07:22.Disraeli, he was a Tory, but don't let that put you off, for the
:07:22. > :07:27.moment. Let's remember what Disraeli was celebrated for, it was
:07:27. > :07:31.a vision of Britain, where passion, loyalty, dedications to the common
:07:31. > :07:36.cause, courses through the veins of all, and nobody feels left out. It
:07:36. > :07:42.was a vision of Britain coming to the to overcome the challenges we
:07:42. > :07:47.face. Disraeli called it "One Nation". We heard the phrase again
:07:47. > :07:50.as the country game together to defeat facisim, and we heard it
:07:50. > :08:00.again as Clement Attlee's Labour Government rebuilt Britain after
:08:00. > :08:00.
:08:00. > :08:06.the war. Friends, I didn't become leader of the Labour Party to
:08:06. > :08:10.reinvent the world of Disraeli, or Attlee, but I do believe in that
:08:10. > :08:14.spirit. The Tories would later attack Miliband, saying he cannot
:08:14. > :08:17.be one-nation, when a day earlier he launched class warfare on the
:08:17. > :08:22.Prime Minister. But their private worry is that Miliband has launched
:08:22. > :08:29.class warfare on the very rich, aligning himself with everybody
:08:29. > :08:33.else. Next April David Cameron will be writing a cheque for �40,000 to
:08:33. > :08:38.each and every millionaire in Britain. The Prime Minister is not
:08:38. > :08:44.actually doing that, but Miliband's game is clear. That is more than
:08:44. > :08:49.the average person earns in a whole year. And he thrilled lots of bet-
:08:49. > :08:54.makers with the "P" word. I say this, you can't be a one-nation
:08:54. > :08:57.Prime Minister if you raise taxes on ordinary families and cut taxes
:08:57. > :09:02.for millionaires. You can't be a one-nation Prime Minister if all
:09:02. > :09:07.you do is seek to divide the country. Divide the country between
:09:07. > :09:13.north and south, public and private, those who can work and those who
:09:13. > :09:17.can't work. And you can't be a one- nation Prime Minister if your Chief
:09:17. > :09:24.Whip insults the great police officers of our country by calling
:09:24. > :09:30.them plebs! The rhythm was not the usual sterile patter of political
:09:30. > :09:34.speeches, sometimes it showed, polish relinquished for a bit of
:09:34. > :09:44.personality. Have you ever seen a more incompetent, hopeless, out-of-
:09:44. > :09:46.touch, U-turning, pledge-breaking, make-it-up-as-you-go-along, back-
:09:46. > :09:53.of-the envelope shower than this Prime Minister and his Government.
:09:53. > :09:59.That is my faith. One o'Clock Gun nation, a country for all, -- one-
:09:59. > :10:02.nation, a country for all, everyone playing their part, a Britain we
:10:02. > :10:05.rebuild together. Thank you very much.
:10:05. > :10:10.Wow, I was wrong, that was probably the best speech Ed Miliband has
:10:10. > :10:13.given since becoming leader, even critics of his standing next to me
:10:13. > :10:16.watching it, accepted it was a very powerful speech. I would say he
:10:16. > :10:19.would now be pleased with both the voice he has shown to the public
:10:19. > :10:24.and the argument he has made. It is now over to you whether you like
:10:24. > :10:29.that voice and accept the argument. There were policies announced today,
:10:29. > :10:35.there was an argument, there was even some political ancestor
:10:35. > :10:36.stealing. Individually they are not the story. Today belongs to the
:10:36. > :10:41.inperSeptemberabilities of parliament, Ed Miliband landed one
:10:41. > :10:43.in the gut. The designated Ed Miliband
:10:43. > :10:49.cheerleader for tonight is the Shadow Business Secretary, Chuka
:10:49. > :10:56.Umunna. He's in Manchester. Can you tell us, Chuka Umunna. Hi Jeremy.
:10:56. > :11:04.Hell lo. How is a one-nation Labour Party blifrpb different --
:11:04. > :11:07.different from previous Labour parties? The message Ed got over
:11:07. > :11:10.successfully today, is we have big problems as a country, we have the
:11:10. > :11:13.short-term challenges around growth, we need growth back in the economy.
:11:13. > :11:17.We have got long-term economic challenges, which require a
:11:17. > :11:19.complete restructuring and building of a new economy. Viewers of this
:11:19. > :11:23.programme are really facing the biggest squeeze on their living
:11:23. > :11:27.standards in a generation. The question is, how do you tackle
:11:27. > :11:32.that? Do you want to answer my question, how is the Labour Party a
:11:32. > :11:37.one-nation Labour Party, different to other Labour parties? If you
:11:37. > :11:41.look at our embrace of business, that, perhaps, is not something
:11:41. > :11:46.that has been associated with say, old Labour, in the times past. The
:11:46. > :11:49.point we have been making today is, for example, yes, we're looking to
:11:49. > :11:53.the private sector to grow the economy in the future, and business
:11:53. > :11:56.has a role in, that but we are looking for business to work in
:11:56. > :12:01.partnership with our FE sector, to produce the training and skilling
:12:01. > :12:04.up of our young people that are needed to power our economy. If you
:12:04. > :12:08.say look at the message in and around banking, Jeremy, we are
:12:08. > :12:12.saying, for example, in relation to banking, look, it is not a question
:12:12. > :12:16.of banker-bashing, we actually want to see the banking sector reformed,
:12:16. > :12:20.restored to its former greatness, but to serve the real economy, to
:12:20. > :12:27.serve our small and medium-sized business. So on the line, if you
:12:27. > :12:32.have a line from the Labour Party, Michael Foot on one end, Tony Blair
:12:32. > :12:37.on the other, where abouts is Miliband's Labour Party? I wouldn't,
:12:37. > :12:40.I'm not necessarily in favour of defining by personalities. I think
:12:40. > :12:44.the point is we are Social Democrats. It is by policy, is what
:12:44. > :12:50.I'm looking for? We are democratic socialists, or whatever you want to
:12:50. > :12:55.call it. We believe we are mutually independent, we want to give
:12:55. > :12:58.individuals and the families the platform to go on to achieve their
:12:58. > :13:01.dreams and aspiration, we believe that is only in the context of a
:13:01. > :13:04.strong society. That involves much of our approach to how we think we
:13:04. > :13:09.should resolve the issues facing the economy. That is why we argue
:13:09. > :13:13.for an active industrial strategy, where you have Government acting
:13:13. > :13:16.collaberatively with business to produce solutions. That is
:13:16. > :13:20.different from the story extrapolate of things, their
:13:20. > :13:23.assessment is the best thing Government can do, is stand aside,
:13:23. > :13:28.deregulate everything and leave it to the market. If we learned
:13:28. > :13:33.nothing from the 2009/09 crash, that is a broken and failed
:13:33. > :13:38.approach. Ed Miliband said everyone has to contribute to the success.
:13:38. > :13:42.This one-nation slogan is absurd, when less than 19%, or fewer than
:13:42. > :13:46.19% of the electorate bothered to vote for you? Well, it is not
:13:46. > :13:50.absurd at all, it is about one- nation Britain, it is about
:13:50. > :13:56.everybody. To my mind, what it takes to transform the economy, to
:13:56. > :13:59.transform all of our lives, it is a difficult situation. That is
:13:59. > :14:03.requiring everyone to play their part, that is a slightly different
:14:03. > :14:06.issue as to whether they vote. I tell you what is relevant. This was
:14:06. > :14:10.a personal speech, Ed was explaining why he believes in what
:14:10. > :14:14.he believes in, why does he have faith in all of us as one British
:14:14. > :14:18.people, to sort out the problems that we have got. So you have got
:14:18. > :14:22.quite a lot of detail about his back story and his family. I'm glad
:14:22. > :14:25.you have brought up this voting issue, Jeremy, actually, one of the
:14:25. > :14:30.biggest problems facing us as politicians, people thinking we are
:14:30. > :14:35.all the same. Incredibly people, a lot of people are angry with what
:14:35. > :14:38.the Government has done, in my constituency I have 15 people
:14:38. > :14:41.chasing every Jobcentre Plus vacancy at the moment, a lot of
:14:41. > :14:45.them are very angry. A lot of people are disillusioned with
:14:45. > :14:49.politics. Ed was seeking to say today, this is what I believe and
:14:49. > :14:52.why I believe what I believe, I'm not just any old politician, I'm
:14:52. > :14:57.serious about delivering the change for you and your familiar loose.
:14:57. > :15:01.When he talks about -- Families. When he talks about David Cameron
:15:01. > :15:05.writing a cheque for �40,000 for every millionaire in the country.
:15:05. > :15:08.What he's really telling us is that's what he sees is the
:15:08. > :15:12.management of the economy, that is not what David Cameron is doing,
:15:12. > :15:17.and you know it's not what he's doing, what he's proposing to do is
:15:17. > :15:21.not take away from them �40,000. In that sort of language, Ed Miliband
:15:21. > :15:26.is making it quite clear what he sees as the role of the state and
:15:26. > :15:31.taxation, isn't he? I just simply don't agree with your analysis. The
:15:31. > :15:36.simple fact is, one of the reasons that the cut in the top rate of tax.
:15:36. > :15:40.That is air money, that is the analysis? Why it was so toxic. I
:15:40. > :15:43.will tell you the real analysis behind it, that was so toxic for
:15:43. > :15:47.the Government. It was toxic for the Government because they were
:15:47. > :15:52.doing it at the same time they were, for example, imposing a granny tax
:15:52. > :15:55.and various other things. Do you really think he's writing �40,000
:15:55. > :16:00.cheques for every mill tkwron air in the country, you don't believe
:16:01. > :16:06.that, you are a highly intelligent man? The effect of reducing the top
:16:06. > :16:10.rate of income tax from 50p to 40p, is to give them a tax break in the
:16:10. > :16:14.region of �40,000. This isn't a Labour or Conservative issue.
:16:14. > :16:18.is not writing them a cheque? not a left or right issue, Jeremy
:16:18. > :16:21.that is a right or a wrong issue. The eyes of most of your viewers,
:16:21. > :16:25.to go and dish out a tax break, in that order, to the richest people
:16:25. > :16:28.in this country, at the same time as I have just explained to you,
:16:28. > :16:31.for example in my constituency I have 15 people chasing every
:16:31. > :16:35.Jobcentre Plus vacancy at the moment. That is just wrong. That is
:16:35. > :16:38.wrong to most people watching this programme. This point he made today
:16:38. > :16:42.about not being willing to see a growth in the gap between rich and
:16:42. > :16:48.poor, why does he believe that now, and didn't believe it when you were
:16:48. > :16:53.in Government? I think he's always believed that. I have always
:16:53. > :16:59.believed that. Why did the gap get bigger then? Because, obviously, we
:16:59. > :17:03.should have done more to close the relevant gap -- relative gap.
:17:03. > :17:07.incompetence is it? Of course not. You believe something that you
:17:07. > :17:12.couldn't make happen? Let me answer the question. The fact is s we lost
:17:12. > :17:17.in 2010 for a reason -- -- is we lost in 2010 for a reason, we
:17:17. > :17:22.didn't get everything right. It is a source of regret that the
:17:22. > :17:26.relative gap grew in our time of Government, despite the fact we
:17:26. > :17:31.drew many people out of poverty. What the people want to win back
:17:31. > :17:35.their support, they want us to demonstrate humility, and not that
:17:35. > :17:39.we carry on as if we are entitled to their support, we are not, we
:17:39. > :17:44.have to win it back by showing good policies that make a difference to
:17:44. > :17:50.them. For example, the focus today on the forgotten 50% of people who
:17:51. > :17:53.don't go on to university, but who need those highly-skilled
:17:53. > :17:56.Vocational Qualifications in engineering, for example, we are
:17:56. > :18:01.saying we need more focus on that. We need to change the situation
:18:01. > :18:04.where, for example, only a third of large firms are providing
:18:04. > :18:08.apprenticeship, so we have more apprenticeships for people going
:18:08. > :18:13.not going to university. These make a practical difference to people's
:18:13. > :18:18.lives, that is how you demonstrate that you are serious about
:18:18. > :18:22.affecting change. We have reconvened the Newsnight political
:18:22. > :18:26.panel, who have been watching speeches since Disraeli gave his
:18:26. > :18:34.speeches. Danny Finkelstein, who used to be speechwriter for Robert
:18:34. > :18:41.Peel, and writer on the times, and we have an adviser to Gordon Brown,
:18:41. > :18:44.and Miranda Green who used to be an adviser to Paddy Ashdown, previous
:18:44. > :18:47.leader of the Liberal Democrats. What did you think? Fluent,
:18:47. > :18:52.effective, it will have achieved with the audience, very important,
:18:52. > :18:56.in Westminster and in the party, greater kfdeoints in Ed Miliband's
:18:56. > :19:03.leadership. -- confidence in Ed Miliband's leadership. Personally I
:19:03. > :19:08.think he's too far to the left. He doesn't agree with the analysis and
:19:08. > :19:12.doesn't accept the moderniser PlayBook. I don't agree, he has
:19:12. > :19:16.made it clear and the party conference made it clear that is
:19:16. > :19:23.where they are going to stand. did you think? It was a fantastic
:19:23. > :19:27.performance, he looked as if he was enjoying himself. We haven't seen
:19:27. > :19:30.Ed looking like he was enjoying being Labour leader for quite a
:19:30. > :19:34.while. It will mean Labour voters will have a spring in their step.
:19:34. > :19:41.That is important. One of the things we have seen is Ed has
:19:41. > :19:44.underperformed with Labour voters, by contrast, with how Cameron has
:19:44. > :19:48.with Conservative voters. If he achieves that, that will be a big
:19:49. > :19:53.achievement. How did you enjoy it? I enjoyed it very much. There were
:19:53. > :19:57.some quite good jokes in it? There were, it was a good performance, I
:19:57. > :20:01.hold my hands up and say I misunderestimated this man. I do
:20:02. > :20:06.think it will change the perception. I do think one of his advantages is
:20:06. > :20:08.that he's not as bad as people think he is. I don't mean that as a
:20:08. > :20:14.cheap comment. There is a gulf between his ability, and where
:20:14. > :20:19.people think he is. He has quite a big problem in filling that. Don't
:20:19. > :20:24.let's forget that people don't watch the speeches. This will only
:20:24. > :20:28.have a small role in moving public opinion. But he's got that as an
:20:28. > :20:31.advantage. Personally, I think he should have used it for a more
:20:31. > :20:35.courageous speech. That whole approach would have worked, if he's
:20:35. > :20:42.going, for example, to attack vested interests, he just mentions
:20:42. > :20:46.the banks and Miguel-Anxo Murado, he has vested -- Rupert Murdoch, he
:20:46. > :20:49.has vested interests in his own party. He fought for the leadership
:20:49. > :20:53.because David Miliband believed in doing that, because he doesn't. I
:20:53. > :20:58.agree with David Miliband, he is being true to himself with the
:20:59. > :21:06.speech he delivered. I think the one-nation thing was powerful, at a
:21:06. > :21:10.time when people feel hopeless, it is a hopeful message. Tony Blair
:21:10. > :21:16.talkeded about it, everyone's talking about it. William Hague's
:21:16. > :21:19.spring conference speech of 1999, one-nation. Absurd though that is.
:21:19. > :21:22.Danny is right on the substance of where he has positioned himself in
:21:22. > :21:26.terms of individual messages and policies, what I thought was
:21:26. > :21:30.interesting today is that when you watch the arc of the speech, you
:21:30. > :21:35.didn't come away with that. It was much more of a Tony Blair moment of
:21:35. > :21:42.speaking to the whole nation. In that sense I actually thought the
:21:42. > :21:47.one-nation unifying message was very clever. Is it a problem?
:21:47. > :21:50.have a lot of work to do? I think it is a mistake for parties to make
:21:50. > :21:54.policy too far ahead in opposition, even close to the election. They
:21:54. > :21:57.get strung up on policies that don't work. People don't follow
:21:57. > :22:04.them, they don't understand what the parties are saying. I think
:22:04. > :22:08.that was the right decision. Where I question the strategy is that
:22:08. > :22:12.he's a few points ahead in the polls, maybe even ten points, he
:22:12. > :22:16.could use the political capital he has built up to take risks with the
:22:16. > :22:21.party, and move the perception, so swing voters believe they are safe
:22:21. > :22:26.to vote Labour again. People aren't listening at the moment. In a sense
:22:26. > :22:29.I think this is about shoring up. Why are they not listening? Because
:22:29. > :22:34.they don't listen to Labour Party leaders' speeches at conferences,
:22:34. > :22:38.they don't watch conferences, they simply don't. It was brave of him
:22:38. > :22:41.to say today, that he was there to prove to you that not all
:22:41. > :22:44.politicians are the same. Good luck at the moment with that. What we
:22:44. > :22:48.learned from the speech is he's not going to do that, he's never going
:22:48. > :22:51.to do it. He didn't just not do it because it wasn't the moment. He
:22:51. > :22:54.has made a decision, he thinks the electorate has moved towards the
:22:54. > :23:00.left because of the financial cry he is, that he can pitch himself to
:23:00. > :23:04.the left of where Tony Blair of. He said that explicitly, with quite an
:23:04. > :23:07.acidic passage on new Labour, I thought. I don't agree with him
:23:07. > :23:11.politically, you wouldn't expect me to do so. I think he will have
:23:11. > :23:16.trouble making that work, but, at least that is what he thinks. If he
:23:16. > :23:20.was, if his attempt was to show he was authentic, I think that he had
:23:20. > :23:25.to say what he thought. He was true to himself. He came over as the
:23:25. > :23:29.nice man he is. I think that came through very clearly. Danny talked
:23:29. > :23:31.about spending political capital, to be tough on your own people.
:23:32. > :23:35.That's incredibly important, particularly if you are going to
:23:35. > :23:40.sell yourself in the next two-and- a-half years as a Government in
:23:40. > :23:44.waiting. I think today he was earning thatAl, that you can now
:23:44. > :23:49.askp -- earning that capital, that you can now ask him to spend. I
:23:49. > :23:53.don't think he could have made that speech before now. I'm desperate to
:23:53. > :23:57.know, why given he can make a speech like that, that his reading
:23:57. > :24:02.from a script is quite abysmal. Why did they let him do that. He has
:24:02. > :24:06.fuelly done this at conference before very -- he has actually done
:24:06. > :24:10.that, at conference before he has done that before, everyone has
:24:10. > :24:14.thought where is Ed. He has made those bits of speeches before and
:24:14. > :24:21.strung them together. Usually when somebody repeats, when somebody has
:24:21. > :24:23.an apparently huge feat of memory, Elizabeth Dole did this at a
:24:23. > :24:29.Republican convention, it was because she made that speech over
:24:29. > :24:33.and over again. I think what's impressive about it is to do it on
:24:33. > :24:39.such a huge occasion and show no everybodys. What voters would
:24:39. > :24:44.complain about him -- Nerves. voters will complain is he has no
:24:44. > :24:48.charisma, were there swing voters watching they would have been
:24:48. > :24:52.surprised. Voters don't like reading because they think someone
:24:52. > :24:59.has else has written it. It was a good performance from that point of
:24:59. > :25:05.view, it will have a limited swing because of people watching it.
:25:06. > :25:12.is like an echo chamber? People in that echo chamber will hear him out
:25:12. > :25:15.and he will have a following. just not overestimate it, really,
:25:15. > :25:18.one of the things that happens constantly in politics, I always
:25:18. > :25:21.used to remember this with William Hague, you would wake up the next
:25:22. > :25:26.morning after thinking you had done brilliantly, destroy Tony Blair in
:25:26. > :25:33.the House of Commons, nothing moved. No-one noticed. So he has to do
:25:34. > :25:42.this again and again. S this is the beginning, the have noticed.
:25:42. > :25:45.problem is the one-nation concept was quite thin. The interview with
:25:45. > :25:50.Mr Umunna indicated there wasn't very much to it. It seemed to go on
:25:50. > :25:55.and on. The answer without any content. Maybe I'm being unfair. I
:25:56. > :26:00.couldn't detect what it was. I just thought I left wondering what it
:26:00. > :26:02.really of. The reason is, doesn't really want to steal the
:26:02. > :26:08.Conservatives clothes and be a Conservative, that is not what he
:26:08. > :26:12.is. That's not what he wants to do. He hardly, the elephant in the room
:26:12. > :26:15.of the deficit, the fact we are bust. That hardly got a look in
:26:15. > :26:19.anywhere? That is the thing, the question of whether people will,
:26:19. > :26:26.once again, be willing to trust the Labour Party with the nation's
:26:26. > :26:31.finances is the only thing that matters, really. But I do think it
:26:31. > :26:36.is an important day. The only one of the difficult issues that Labour
:26:36. > :26:41.has to Faye, he faced into it well, was immigration, his language was
:26:41. > :26:45.interesting. He definitely realised he has to do something on that. He
:26:45. > :26:49.talked about welfare effectively, I thought. Moderately. I thought it
:26:49. > :26:52.was a bit thin. You must have been chuffed he wasn't attacking the
:26:52. > :26:58.Liberal Democrats? There was one mention, and one boo from the hall,
:26:58. > :27:02.but, yeah, the Lib Dems got off lightly. I think if he has listened
:27:02. > :27:07.to the message that the real enemy is the Tory Party, that is a
:27:07. > :27:10.positive thing as well. He has a party base, he might have a problem
:27:10. > :27:14.forming a coalition with the Liberal Democrats, he might wish to
:27:14. > :27:20.do that. I did a fringe meeting at a Labour Party Conference, the
:27:20. > :27:24.anger from the conference floor about the Liberal Democrats, Ed
:27:24. > :27:28.Balls calling them Tories. He doesn't want to stoke them out.
:27:28. > :27:32.could find a lot of hatred for the Lib Dems at Conservative
:27:32. > :27:36.conferences too, couldn't you? not refraining from that myselfment
:27:36. > :27:40.I'm saying he has to be careful not to stoke it up. If he stoke it is
:27:40. > :27:45.up he could find when the moment comes, the party base won't let him
:27:45. > :27:49.do what he needs to do. Not a bad few days, if these things matter at
:27:49. > :27:52.all, any longer for the Labour Party, was it? I think, as I say,
:27:52. > :27:55.the Labour Party and Labour voters will have a spring in their step
:27:56. > :27:59.now. That's quite an achievement. They haven't had had. They have
:27:59. > :28:04.been thinking why did we vote for this guy. I don't think they are
:28:04. > :28:13.thinking that tonight. The UK Border Agency has done it again, it
:28:13. > :28:23.is in asylum of an Afghan man wounded in the war. There are
:28:23. > :28:24.
:28:24. > :28:28.plenty of people wounded in war, when Johnny Tocco was injured he
:28:28. > :28:38.was working for -- Emily Atak, was injured he was working for the
:28:38. > :28:54.
:28:54. > :28:57.Interpretors are the filter through which -- interpreters are the
:28:57. > :29:02.filter through which NATO absorbs in Afghanistan. Their mission is
:29:02. > :29:07.dangerous, dozens have been killed, and millions have been wounded,
:29:07. > :29:11.among them, Mohammad Rafi Hottak, who soon learned that this job
:29:11. > :29:18.could have terrible reprecussions. We are already on the blacklist of
:29:18. > :29:23.the Taliban. If they catch us, even after I have left my job, they will
:29:23. > :29:30.kill me. They need to take their revenge, the best person they can
:29:30. > :29:35.get hold of is interm pret ters, they have proven -- interm pret
:29:35. > :29:41.ters, they have proven -- interm preters, they have proven that. If
:29:41. > :29:45.you quit your job it doesn't make sense, you are making yourself
:29:45. > :29:53.vulnerable, they can watch you anywhere. This week he has been in
:29:53. > :30:01.the media spotlight, following the Home Office rejection of his
:30:01. > :30:06.application to stay in the country. I was horrified that the Home
:30:06. > :30:10.Office has not bothered to check the facts, there are witnesses, and
:30:10. > :30:14.evidence in the support units, there are witnesses, myself and
:30:14. > :30:22.others who would verify the fact that he had worked for us for a
:30:22. > :30:28.very long time. Back in 2007, the Afghan interpreter was patrolling
:30:28. > :30:31.on the streets of Sangin, one of the most dangerous places in his
:30:31. > :30:35.country. The troops he was with came under attack. Even then I had
:30:35. > :30:39.to do translation there. The Afghan forces were firing, the British
:30:39. > :30:47.were saying ceasefire, stop firing, they wouldn't stop firing. Even
:30:47. > :30:51.though I didn't have the strength to even say a word, because I was
:30:51. > :30:58.internally bleeding and externally, it was a lot of pressure on my
:30:58. > :31:03.chest. God knows how did I survive. Even at that time I stood up again
:31:03. > :31:09.and I said stop firing, stop firing. And I don't know did I fall or they
:31:09. > :31:15.laid me down again. Any way, they stopped firing.
:31:15. > :31:19.The British officer he was with had been killed by an IED, or impro-
:31:19. > :31:24.advised bomb, and he was badly wounded. However, after being
:31:24. > :31:29.treated for those injuries, schrapnal wounds that still heavily
:31:29. > :31:32.scar his body, he returned to his duties. It was when he finally
:31:32. > :31:38.decided to quit the army and come to Britain, that his problems
:31:38. > :31:41.started in ernest. Lacking the proper papers, Rafi paid people
:31:41. > :31:45.smugglers to bring him into this country, hidden in the back of a
:31:45. > :31:50.lory. Sbs he got here he went -- lorry. As soon as he got here, he
:31:50. > :31:54.went to the authorities to try to legalise his position. It was at
:31:54. > :31:59.that point a situation that can only be described as Kafka-esque,
:31:59. > :32:04.began to unfold. This week, after 15 months awaiting a decision, the
:32:04. > :32:08.UK Border Agency wrote to Rafi telling him he could not stay in
:32:08. > :32:13.this country. Their letter pointed to discrepancies in ID cards he
:32:14. > :32:20.submitted, saying none of these record his name as Mohammad Rafi
:32:20. > :32:24.Hottak, it added, despite a number of inquiries -- enquiryies from the
:32:24. > :32:29.MoD, his employment was not verified, and bizarrely, throughout
:32:29. > :32:39.his interaction with the UK Border Agency, he had spoken English.
:32:39. > :32:40.
:32:40. > :32:44.say, I can't prove in my claim who I am. The reason I came to the UK
:32:44. > :32:49.is because I have served this country, this Government, in
:32:49. > :32:54.Afghanistan, and I have considered them as my own family. I speak
:32:54. > :33:02.English, and I, if not fully, but partially I understand the culture
:33:02. > :33:09.and the way that things work here. I understand why you are all angry,
:33:09. > :33:15.I'm very sorry. The interpreters have no guaranteed asylum in
:33:15. > :33:20.Britain. If they apply today they have to join everyone else who is
:33:20. > :33:28.applying for either refugee status or humanitarian protection. And,
:33:28. > :33:33.there is no recognition of the enormous danger that people who
:33:33. > :33:39.have been interpreting for the British or Americans are facing.
:33:39. > :33:44.They are very much special cases. Tonight, the Border Agency has said
:33:44. > :33:48.it is reviewing Rafi's asylum application, because the increased
:33:48. > :33:52.level of publicity around his case has led to new and significant
:33:52. > :33:56.information coming to light. However, the questions of why it
:33:56. > :34:05.has taken 15 months for them to realise their mistake, and what
:34:05. > :34:10.happens to others in similar situations remain.
:34:10. > :34:17.Rory Stewart is a member of the Foreign Affairs Select Committee,
:34:17. > :34:20.he was in Iraq where his interpreter was killed in 2005.
:34:20. > :34:24.Heather Barr, a former UN official who works for Human Rights Watch
:34:24. > :34:33.joins us also. How vulnerable are people who have done jobs like
:34:33. > :34:36.acting as an interpret er? They are extremely vulnerable, the Taliban
:34:36. > :34:41.has talked about how they will target Afghans who work with
:34:41. > :34:44.foreigners, they have said after the foreigners who leave those who
:34:44. > :34:48.are collaborators have been punished for their treason. The
:34:48. > :34:52.threats are real. Even people while the troops have been here receive
:34:52. > :34:56.threat, letters, phone calls. It is very strange that think that
:34:56. > :35:01.somebody would have to prove individually they are facing a
:35:01. > :35:05.threat, rather than there being recognition that everybody in this
:35:05. > :35:10.category is facing a threat. Given your own experience in Iraq what do
:35:10. > :35:14.you make of this case? I find it very Shaughnessying. I think one of
:35:14. > :35:18.the big -- very shocking. I think one of the bigger questions about
:35:18. > :35:20.the system is it is a legalistic approach. People are not good
:35:20. > :35:25.enough to take on a special obligation for those who have
:35:25. > :35:30.worked for us. Your own experience, where your own translator was
:35:30. > :35:34.murdered, after you had left, I believe, there is no doubt that was
:35:34. > :35:37.as a consequence of the work he had been doing? It is difficult to
:35:37. > :35:40.prove, but he was receiving death threats connected to the fact that
:35:40. > :35:44.he had had worked with me. And there were two other women that I
:35:44. > :35:52.worked with who were also killed. It was the time just after we had
:35:52. > :35:58.departed from Alimara, where the militia were going around rounding
:35:58. > :36:03.up people who were working with us. My friend was 25 years old, he
:36:03. > :36:06.spoke very good English, he worked as a translator for me not because
:36:06. > :36:10.he was being paid, but because he believed in Britain, and he was
:36:10. > :36:15.killed. There are thousands acting as interpreters and helping western
:36:15. > :36:20.forces in one way or another there. Presumably there has to be some
:36:20. > :36:24.mechanism, can they all be admitted to Britain, the United Nations, or
:36:25. > :36:29.Canada or wherever? It is definitely true that there are many
:36:29. > :36:33.thousands of Afghans, maybe tens of thousands of Afghans who are at
:36:33. > :36:36.risk, because they have worked for international organisations. But,
:36:36. > :36:40.interpreters who have worked with the military are really a special
:36:40. > :36:44.case. They are really unique in the fact that they have been seen
:36:44. > :36:49.constantly on patrol, with members of the international military, I
:36:49. > :36:53.don't think the Taliban sees any difference between them and Afghan
:36:53. > :36:57.security forces, or international military. So, I think, if you are
:36:57. > :37:02.going to draw a lion, certainly they should be on the side of the
:37:02. > :37:06.line where -- a line, certainly they should be on the side of the
:37:07. > :37:10.line that should seech special obligations. I don't agree, we
:37:10. > :37:15.don't have an obligation to everyone who has worked as a
:37:15. > :37:20.translator, but we have an obligation to be diligent to look
:37:20. > :37:24.at everyone who has worked as translator N this case they weren't
:37:24. > :37:28.diligent enough. It points to a bigger problem, which is the whole
:37:28. > :37:31.asylum system seems to be often a lottery, and run in a very strange
:37:31. > :37:34.fashion. Do you have a suggested way of dealing with that? I think
:37:34. > :37:38.the first thing is to recognise we have a huge problem, which is that
:37:38. > :37:42.it is very difficult for someone in Britain to try to guess whether a
:37:42. > :37:45.story is real or not. This has come out of people desperately trying to
:37:45. > :37:49.second guess what is happening in a village in Afghanistan. I have had
:37:49. > :37:52.friends from Afghanistan, who have successfully come into the country,
:37:52. > :37:57.with much less than that. And others who have been turned down.
:37:57. > :38:01.The second thing is, he has come in through human smuggling, we have
:38:01. > :38:06.created a system that incentivises people to work with criminal gangs
:38:06. > :38:12.and smuggle themselves into the country rather than a proper system.
:38:12. > :38:16.The Border Agency said it couldn't prove he was working with the
:38:16. > :38:21.British military, it took us 20 minutes to get someone to verify
:38:21. > :38:26.that he did? Indeed, that is why everyone needs to be checked more
:38:26. > :38:30.carefully. The broader problem is I turn up and say I have come from a
:38:30. > :38:33.village in central Afghanistan and feel under threat, it is very
:38:33. > :38:36.difficult for the Border Agency to check that is true, in this case
:38:36. > :38:40.they got it wrong. Presumably there are all sorts of things that you
:38:40. > :38:45.might have done to assist the international forces in Afghanistan,
:38:45. > :38:50.which you might feel, give you a legitimate fear of being at risk in
:38:50. > :38:56.Afghanistan from the Taliban and others. All sorts of people, it
:38:56. > :39:04.might be just a farmer who tells them that there are some IEDs on a
:39:04. > :39:09.road somewhere? Yes but a farmer who tells a soldier that there are
:39:09. > :39:13.IEDs on the road, he can whisper into his ear, it is a one-time
:39:13. > :39:17.event, he can melt back on to the farmland and no-one will know he
:39:17. > :39:21.shared that manufacturing. An interpreter has no way of being
:39:21. > :39:26.invisible, and showing their support for, not just the
:39:26. > :39:32.international community, but the mission. It is worth rembering that
:39:32. > :39:36.Britain's military effort in Afghanistan is impossible without
:39:36. > :39:43.these interpreters, you can't look for IEDs, you can't partner with a
:39:43. > :39:48.team from the Afghan national army, you can't reach out and try to
:39:48. > :39:51.befriend the population and engage them, without the assistance of
:39:51. > :39:55.interpreters. These interpreters are there in the line of fire,
:39:55. > :39:59.along with the soldiers every day. They are also facing additional
:39:59. > :40:04.dangers when they go home at night. I also think we should understand
:40:04. > :40:08.we are operating in a culture where Afghans feel these kinds of
:40:08. > :40:12.obligations very strongly it is a culture in which that kind of
:40:12. > :40:15.relationship, of having worked with someone or partnering someone would
:40:15. > :40:20.make what we are doing here shocking. Because our whole
:40:20. > :40:24.presence in Iraq is based on some idea of moral legitimacy, we have
:40:24. > :40:28.to be particularly careful in how we behave. Not just ethically, but
:40:28. > :40:33.simply in terms of our whole reputation, not to be seen to be
:40:33. > :40:38.letting people down. Back to the experiment you saw at the start of
:40:38. > :40:42.the programme. Why does boiling water, apparently, freeze quicker
:40:42. > :40:47.than cold water. In June this year, the Royal Society of Chamsry
:40:47. > :40:51.launched a competition to find the most plausible -- Royal Society of
:40:51. > :40:56.Chemistry launched a competition to find the most plausible answer.
:40:56. > :41:01.They didn't expect a great entry but thousands of entries came from
:41:01. > :41:07.around the world. They broadened the competition by opening it up to
:41:08. > :41:17.the public. Earlier the professor put the
:41:18. > :41:45.
:41:45. > :41:48.# Ice ice baby So what you were seeing there was
:41:48. > :41:53.some boiling water and some water at room temperature, each being
:41:54. > :41:57.placeded in a freezer, which will now be brought from the freezer by
:41:57. > :42:02.our producer, Hannah, who will bring it across to the studio, we
:42:02. > :42:07.will see whether the frozen water or the boiling water has, in fact,
:42:07. > :42:15.frozen and the room temperature water hasn't frozen. It's taking an
:42:15. > :42:19.awfully long time to get it out of there. Well done! We have a big
:42:19. > :42:27.problem with the experiment, neither has frozen. Did you plug in
:42:27. > :42:31.that freezer? I blame the friezer! This is rubbish -- Freezer. This is
:42:31. > :42:36.rubbish, they are both liquid. sure the red one is colder. Stick
:42:36. > :42:39.your finger in, they are both the same. This is a completely rubbish
:42:39. > :42:44.experiment. But I think that is an experiment, that is live television,
:42:44. > :42:49.it is a real experiment. Indeed it is. Had it been rehearsed perhaps
:42:49. > :42:54.we could have got it right? could have faked it, but we didn't.
:42:54. > :42:58.If this were going properly if someone had had plugged the fridge
:42:58. > :43:06.in, the red one, I think, is the hot one, the boiling one, would
:43:06. > :43:10.have frozen by now? It would have. The one at room temperatures
:43:10. > :43:14.wouldn't have? People can do it at home, to see if what we are saying
:43:14. > :43:19.is true or not. What are you looking for? We are looking to find
:43:19. > :43:24.why this happens. We don't know. you don't know, how can you judge
:43:24. > :43:27.when someone has given you the right answer? If they give us a
:43:27. > :43:31.good explanation of the answer, we can decide whether it is plausible
:43:31. > :43:35.or not. We can do more experiments to see if it is right or not.
:43:35. > :43:39.you going to do those experiments? I would like to do those
:43:39. > :43:45.experiments. If someone writes in and says, I think the reason, I
:43:45. > :43:50.should add we added dye to these, maybe it is the food colouring.
:43:50. > :43:54.Even the tray isn't cold. This is a complete shambles. I'm very sorry
:43:54. > :43:58.about that. But your experiment, your desire for knowledge at the
:43:58. > :44:02.Royal Society of Chemistry, is impressive. You are looking for
:44:02. > :44:06.people to give you an explanation for the fact that this phenomenon
:44:06. > :44:10.occurs in a well-regulated experiment. That's right. But you
:44:10. > :44:16.have no way, have you, of judging which is the riech explanation?
:44:16. > :44:20.Well, I think we can -- Right explanation? I think we can look at
:44:20. > :44:24.the explanations that people give us and see is it based on fact, it
:44:24. > :44:28.might give other people ideas to do more experiments. If someone writes
:44:28. > :44:32.in, how many have you had? Nearly 22,000 explanations.
:44:32. > :44:39.explanations, have you read them all? -- 22,000 explanations, have
:44:39. > :44:43.you read them all? Several of them, not them all. You find one that
:44:43. > :44:46.seems plausible, do you give it the money, how much is it, �1,000?
:44:46. > :44:50.is, we are asking the public to look at some of the answers and see
:44:50. > :44:56.which answers they like, we are also putting a panel of experts
:44:56. > :44:59.together, other scientists, to consider the responses, and put
:44:59. > :45:04.their vote in, we will see what happens. Is there any practical
:45:04. > :45:08.application at all? The main reason for it was to get people interested
:45:08. > :45:14.in scientific experiments, and to do the experiments and think up
:45:14. > :45:20.answers for themselves. But, bottom line, if you want a gin and tonic
:45:20. > :45:30.with some ice in it, put hot water in the freezer. That is a great
:45:30. > :45:54.
:45:55. > :45:57.practical application. Tomorrow That's all from nice night tonight,
:45:57. > :46:07.until tomorrow, good night -- Newsnight tonight, until tomorrow,
:46:07. > :46:30.
:46:30. > :46:34.Hello again, a lot of showers to come through the night. As we head
:46:34. > :46:38.into tomorrow there should be more sunshine, and the showers should be
:46:38. > :46:41.fewer. A scattering of showers and sunny spells, the winds not as
:46:41. > :46:44.strong and blustery, the winds feeding in frequent showers to the
:46:44. > :46:50.North West of England. Again, Cumbria could be the wettest place
:46:50. > :46:53.in the country. Fewer showers east of the Pennine, for most of the day
:46:53. > :46:57.it will be dryer. Sunshine coming out across the south-east of
:46:57. > :47:00.England, a scattering of showers, colder than today. A much better
:47:00. > :47:03.day for the south west of England. Fewer showers, more sunshine,
:47:03. > :47:06.particularly in the afternoon. There will be some sunshine in
:47:06. > :47:09.Wales as well. In the afternoon it is the north of the country that
:47:09. > :47:13.will have most of the showers, those showers pulling away from
:47:13. > :47:16.most of Northern Ireland, so more in the way of sunshine again in the
:47:16. > :47:20.afternoon. A mixture really in Scotland, there will be some
:47:20. > :47:23.showers developing a little more widely, most will be light with the
:47:23. > :47:28.best of the sunshine for the eastern side of the country. It may
:47:28. > :47:31.well stay dry for the most part in Edinburgh and Inverness, not just
:47:31. > :47:35.into Wednesday but Thursday too. Further south we will have sunny
:47:35. > :47:39.spells, a scattering of showers, the odd heavy one can't be ruled
:47:39. > :47:43.out. Thursday looks that bit dryer even further. Arguably Thursday is